Disagreeing to agree - Nepali Times

Publisher\'s Note
Disagreeing to agree

FROM ISSUE #491 (26 FEB 2010 - 04 MARCH 2010) | TABLE OF CONTENTS

SUBSCRIBE NT

REFER

WRITE TO EDITOR

Reading the daily headlines, this current deadlock is inexplicable. Everyone agrees that there should be a political consensus, there should be a government of national unity, that the political leaders should stop bickering among themselves and within their parties. In fact, going by what they say, there really should be no reason for constitution writing and the peace process to be stalled.

But, as we all know, the behaviour of the political leadership is just the opposite of what they say. One stumbling block, as we see it, is the inability or the unwillingness on the part of the Maoist party to publicly renounce violence and stop the threats to take over the state in every other speech they make.

We realise it is like telling a leopard to erase its spots. Maoists wouldn't be Maoists unless they are committed to a violent overthrow of the state and its replacement by a totalitarian people's republic. But these aren't ordinary Maoists, they won the elections through the ballot, and not the bullet. And they had to resign because they lost the support of their coalition partners.

It is also clear that the peace process will continue to be deadlocked unless the Maoists are accommodated into the government. Finding a power-sharing formula acceptable to all parties should be the main goal of the High Level Political Mechanism. Unfortunately, the mechanism has a trust deficit, not just among its three main members but also between the members within their own parties.

There are many reasons why we need a new accommodation between the main political parties: to bring the peace process back on track, and to give that final political push necessary for the CA members to agree on, at least, the preamble and main thrust of the new constitution.

In a scenario dominated by politics, we know we are crying in the wilderness to talk about the economy. But even if it is only for economic reasons, this government must be reformatted. The state has no credibility. The economy is on the verge of collapse. The cost of capital is so high that big projects are not viable anymore. Investors have fled, there is huge capital flight. Even the investors who are here are being harassed, as made evident by the Maoists? extortion of power projects. Businesses struggle to cope with the daily 12-hour power cuts. Corruption has never been worse than it is now.

Along the Tarai, the phrase 'black money' has come to mean the premium you pay for Indian currency because it is in such short supply. Traders are hoarding Indian rupees like they hoard sugar or kerosene. All because the Finance Minister made an irresponsible statement about rejigging the rupee parity with India.

We need an urgent revamp of the government to send a positive message to investors and the Nepali public that there is a government in place.

READ ALSO:
Standstill - FROM ISSUE #491 (26 FEB 2010 - 04 MARCH 2010)
Optimistic, but only if there is a political consensus - FROM ISSUE #491 (26 FEB 2010 - 04 MARCH 2010)

1. Arthur
When something is "inexplicable" a sensible person reviews their assumptions to figure what they got wrong so that they can find an explanation based on a different understanding of the facts from what they previously believed.

There is nothing inexplicable about the facts that "The state has no credibility. The economy is on the verge of collapse... Corruption has never been worse than it is now." The largest party that won the elections resigned because others backed the army Chief of Staff in refusing to carry out the peace agreement. What credibility and economic achievements would one expect from a coalition of corrupt politicians cobbled together by the Indian ambassador to preserve the feudal army from democratization?

According to these people, replacing COAS Katwal with his own Deputy would have placed the army under Maoist control so Nepal was "saved" from "capture of state power" by the Maoists.

Neither the actual facts about Prachanda's resignation, nor the absurd theory presented by the current gang at the time is mentioned by the publisher. So the current deadlock remains "inexplicable".

According to the publisher "Finding a power-sharing formula acceptable to all parties should be the main goal of the High Level Political Mechanism." and "we need a new accommodation between the main political parties: to bring the peace process back on track, and to give that final political push necessary for the CA members to agree on, at least, the preamble and main thrust of the new constitution."

But how can the peace process become on track unless the old feudal army is actually democratized? What is the point of drafting a new constitution without basic agreement that Nepal will in fact be governed under a constitution rather than at the discretion of the COAS and the Indian Ambassador?

It is obvious that Nepal cannot be governed without its largest party. That does not change the fact that this party refuses to participate in a government that is not committed to actual democratization of the Nepal Army.

So there is a deadlock. The HLPM can resolve that deadlock by correcting the previous error. It cannot resolve it by "accommodating" the Maoists to "share power" with people who refuse to carry out the peace agreement.

Posted on: 26 FEB 2010 | 3:58 PM NST

2. Anonymous

I want to know your version after this. And please state it because I am unaware of the secret and true developments of the events.

-----------------------------------

"The plan is to democratise the Army which means to politicise the Army. It will take 5 to 7 years for that. If we are really going to have integration the way to do it is unit-wise so that our units remain with us. This is important if we do it unit wise. We can react if we are betrayed." Further, regarding the verification of PLA combatants by the United Nations Mission in Nepal (UNMIN), Prachanda claimed, "Speaking honestly we were few earlier. We were 7,000 to 8,000. If we had reported that, our number would have reduced to 4,000 after verification. Instead, we claimed 35,000 and now we are 20,000. This is the truth." Explaining the work of the party he said, "How is today's situation different from during the people's war? Talking of form, earlier you were holding the machine gun and, killing or being killed. Today it seems like we are chatting and sipping tea. The form is very different but the gist is still the same. We are both taking the revolution forward?"

The authenticity of the video tapes was subsequently confirmed by Prachanda himself, though he insisted that the scandal of their broadcast was a "ploy against the peace process", claiming that the context within which his remarks were made was 'different', and had since changed.

Posted on: 26 FEB 2010 | 10:54 PM NST

3. Nirmal
One stumbling block, as we see it, is the inability or the unwillingness on the part of the Maoist party to publicly renounce violence and stop the threats to take over the state in every other speech they make.

This is what all are destined to face when a party who raised armed insurrection is allowed to take part in a political process(how incompetent other parties were to allow so) san being disarmed. One thing is the process of negotiation(to see If they abandon bullets) and another completely different thing is to let an armed entity run for elections(ballets). Both are not possible at the same time publisher. Now, the dillema is not only the Maoists but presence of exponenecially increased armed groups who pose a clear threat to democracy(ballots). So the maoists are saying that they would allow integration process complete only after the constitution is prepared and promulgated. How defeatist mentality! They have made the foot soldiers their bargaining chip. Seems that without guns they are nothing.
The future constitution should allow wide-range of political freedom so that any individual be the Maoists, the Goit factions or Tom Dick Harry need not take arms to propagate their ideology.

The Maoists want to be maoists, fine. Goit and others wants to be a separatists and nationalists, it is their ideological choice, but with guns? say a complete NO, then.

The problem is that our democracy that has been slowly accepting political violence as a lesser evil in the bossom of the country is at serious risk of deterioration.

Posted on: 27 FEB 2010 | 12:27 AM NST

4. Arthur
Ok the cut and paste comment from a two year old speech that became big news 9 months ago is actually an improvement from "Anonymous". It is not just a general rant about how much he hates communism, but at least indirectly relevant to the topic of the article.

The fuss about this speech may well be part of the reason why this government has lasted for 9 months instead of collapsing immediately as expected. I don't know any "secret and true developments" but I will respond with my guesses as to what it means as I read the same translation and viewed it very differently from the Nepali media.

The plan is to democratise the Army which means to politicise the Army. It will take 5 to 7 years for that.

That is the heart of the matter. It confirms that when the Maoists insist on "democratizing" the army and their opponents oppose "politicizing" the Army. They both have the same understanding of the two different words and the same expectations of the results in a few years time.

This explicit confirmation seems to have intensified the determination of the anti-Maoist parties to avoid any integration of the two armies at any cost despite having agreed to that in the Comprehensive Peace Agreement. Passionate declarations that integration was "impossible" were based on this "revelation". Only now, 9 months later they are starting to talk of perhaps accepting 3000 out of 19,000 PLA soldiers into the Nepal Army and pretending that the cantonments must be emptied before a constitution can be drafted. Meanwhile far from democratizing the army they cannot even get these feudal relics to obey a court order to hand over one of its "professionals" to answer charges of responsibility for torture and murder of a 15 year old girl.

Prachanda may be over optimistic in believing a feudal army could be transformed in 5 to 7 years. But destroying that army could take just as long, especially if India intervenes in support. So Prachanda was explaining to the fighters that joined the PLA to destroy the feudal regime and its army why they are now being asked to join that army and meanwhile to wait in cantonments instead of fighting (at a time when the Constituent Assembly elections were still being postponed).

The Maoist policy is not just to integrate the PLA as agreed, but also to drastically reduce the size of the army, back to pre-war levels, orient it military training of citizens and development work like road building and base national security on military training for all citizens.

The 2003 peace negotiations collapsed because the anti-Maoist parties rejected the Maoist demand for free elections to a Constituent Assembly. They were eventually forced to agree but they still hope to return to the north Indian Bihari style elections dominated by landlord gangs and preserving the feudal army is their only hope of eventually being able to reverse changes made as a result of free elections.

The point of two armies in one country is to fight a civil war. If the two armies are integrated it will eventually become impossible to resume that civil war. Instead of blindly obeying the officer caste when ordered to fight the people they would be "politicized" citizens who might turn their guns against those officers. There would be no way to ensure that the privileges of the elite in old Nepal can be preserved, given that the overwhelming majority of people want a new Nepal.

Confirmation of that obvious reality is what the anti-Maoist parties panicked about. They are still stuck with it being reality and will eventually have to carry out the peace agreement for the same reason they had to sign it - they cannot win a civil war.

The Nepal Army calls itself "apolitical" and "professional" but it is in fact a feudal army that throughout every attempt to bring Nepal into the modern world has st for thoode old Nepal and the privileged elite that lives off that backwardness. It has doubled in size since the start of the People's War and is specifically dedicated to fighting Maoists (although it also suppressed the other parties).

Far from being "professional" it was far more successful at massacring unarmed villagers and boasting that it had defeated Maoists than preventing the guerillas fighting the police from seizing the Army's own weapons, developing into a regular People's Liberation Army and taking control of 80% of the country. It could not win the last civil war and cannot win another won. So eventually it will have to accept the peace agreement including democratization and integration.

If we are really going to have integration the way to do it is unit-wise so that our units remain with us. This is important if we do it unit wise. We can react if we are betrayed.

This needs little explanation. Spreading individual Maoist soldiers among units commanded by their enemies in an army still five times the size of the PLA would leave them vulnerable to sudden betrayal as occurred when the Nepal Army ended the 2003 peace negotations with a massacre.

No amount of shouting about how "professional" and "apolitical" and generally wonderful the Nepal Army is will ever persuade those who fought it for a decade either to accept it remaining unreformed or risk being massacred while trying to reform it.

We were 7,000 to 8,000. If we had reported that, our number would have reduced to 4,000 after verification. Instead, we claimed 35,000 and now we are 20,000. This is the truth.

Prachanda is speaking to and about the soldiers of the People's Liberation Army. These are regular, uniformed full-time soldiers who lived in camps (now in cantonments) and had no other homes or occupation (light infantry). Far more people took part in the armed struggle but that was the number that could be supported as full-time fighters under war conditions capturing and "extorting" funds and supplies from the enemy. This number was rapidly expanded as soon as it became clear there would be a peace agreement, presumably by recruiting from both the regional guerilla forces (part-time soldiers who are not continuously mobilized and have other occupations to support themselves) and the militia living at home and defending their homes.

Apparantly they tried to get 35,000 into the cantonments before the agreed cut-off date, but only about 20,000 actually stayed for verification and passed verification. Presumably many of the militia went back home (where they have since become the YCL). So now they have about 20,000 trained regular light infantry instead of 7 or 8 thousand.

The outrage about that is phony. Both sides wanted as many Maoist fighters as possible in cantonments rather than outside.
According to the Nepal Army the YCL (former militia) now has 100,000 with 30,000 cadres of which 6,000 are full time. Does anyone really imagine that only 7 or 8 thousand fought in the People's War?

The same outraged people will now be expressing their outrage that 4000 or so "children" they insisted should leave the cantonments have now done so and will soon busy providing the YCL with the benefits of their experience in physical training. Who can help it if feudalists cant think logically about the how the future results from the present?

Of course it will be just as "inexplicable" to the publisher why the anti-parties will end up accepting that they do have to implement the peace agreement they signed. Everything is inexplicable and determined by fate according to this mindset.

Posted on: 28 FEB 2010 | 1:42 PM NST

5. Anonymous
(Overall criticism) Arthur it is a shame that you say that, I have been absolutely true to the topic and have written only in response to your false accusations. While I keep accommodating your outlandish views, you keep running away from having a direct argument, other than one instance when one simple, straightforward rebuttal from me got you. It is not fair you would have to give me a clear instance of when I did what you say I did

----------------------------------------------------

Simply because you seem to be a trained communist propagandist, I am going to make my points with even greater clarity than before. And what is fact to a communist .......................their own imagination.

Now read:

"Instead of blindly obeying the officer caste when ordered to fight the people they would be "politicized" citizens who might turn their guns against those officers. There would be no way to ensure that the privileges of the elite in old Nepal can be preserved, given that the overwhelming majority of people want a new Nepal."

"No amount of shouting about how "professional" and "apolitical" and generally wonderful the Nepal Army is will ever persuade those who fought it for a decade either to accept it remaining unreformed or risk being massacred while trying to reform it."

This army DID NOT get into a fight till a lot later in the murder campaign ignited by the greed of maoists. The army came into the fight after an attack on the Army barracks in Dang on 23rd November 2001, the then government declared a state of emergency in Nepal and moblized the army in addition to the hard pressed Police and Armed Police Force.

Guess who the government was.

Unbelievably, the character of the army is far more democratic than the armies of communist countries ...sorry I forget if I call out on commies that is a digression so I won't.

Overwhelming majority --- 29% votes in the first past the post for the maoist (after intimidation) and that is from the election commission of Nepal. I would urge you to correct me if I am wrong.

Professional because it did not move out of its barracks unless it was clearly ordered to in accordance with the law. Professional because of its conduct in more than enough HR mission. Professional because compared to the intensity of the terrorist activities by the communist murderers, the number of human rights abuses are way less the accusations on any comparable army any where in the world. That there were some and the action clearly is inadequate is a shameful fact.

There is more that I wan't to say based on facts, but then I realize how much rambling there is in stating the truth and how hard it is to imagine a faux analysis.

It accepted the change without firing a single shot. It maintained its discipline in the face of overwhelming humiliation by a bunch of terrorists and traitors including Koirala who suspected that they would revolt on more than one occassion.

"This number was rapidly expanded as soon as it became clear there would be a peace agreement, presumably by recruiting from both the regional guerilla forces (part-time soldiers who are not continuously mobilized and have other occupations to support themselves) and the militia living at home and defending their homes."

"According to the Nepal Army the YCL (former militia) now has 100,000 with 30,000 cadres of which 6,000 are full time. Does anyone really imagine that only 7 or 8 thousand fought in the People's War?"

"outraged people will now be expressing their outrage that 4000 or so "children" they insisted should leave the cantonments have now done so and will soon busy providing the YCL with the benefits of their experience in physical training. Who can help it if feudalists cant think logically about the how the future results from the present?"

The terrorist murderers kidnapped children, threatened their parents with death.

I have to go away now, but I only wish I was a Nepali now. This would have been so worth it.

Posted on: 28 FEB 2010 | 5:37 PM NST

6. jange
Looks like NT has got its knickers thoroughly in a twist. So, we have a political party that has violence as its sine qua non taking part in elections in which they exercised their right to use violence. And this election was considered to be a free and fair election in which the political party exercising its right to use violence to further its political objectives won 40 percent of the seats. So, the NT now wants a consensus between political parties that do not believe violence is a legitimate tool of politics and a party that has been given the right to use violence to further its objectives!!

And the NT also mentions a peace process? And what exactly was this un-peace situation that required a peace process? If I remember rightly it was the same political party exercising its right to use violence to further its political objectives that caused the un-peace situation in the first place.

Posted on: 28 FEB 2010 | 6:59 PM NST

7. Arthur
I don't have time to correct everything Anonymous gets wrong about Nepal but will respond to the extra highlighted paragraph.

The overwhelming majority of voters voted for parties that participated in the second people's movement and pledged themselves to the terms of the peace agreement with a program for building a new Nepal. A large majority voted for parties that even claimed to be "Communist". Only about one third voted for parties that are now part of the UCPN(Maoist). That is why there was a coalition government rather than a Maoist government and that is why it was possible to form a coalition government excluding the largest party when the other parties stopped merely dragging their feet about actually carrying out the program they had been elected on and had committed to when joining the Maoist led coalition and instead openly opposed civilian supremacy over the military.

Those parties will face the consequences of their stand at the next elections. Nepal Congress already collapsed at the last elections, far less Madheshis will vote for the Madheshi parties as a result of seeing how they actually performed. UML will continue disintegrating. Royalists will continue to be politically irrelevant with little better to do than post complaints about it here.

As long as the anti-Maoist parties and the Army do not prevent the holding of free elections the Maoists will not return to armed struggle but will just continue organizing the people as they are now doing with a door knocking campaign throughout Nepal while the other parties talk to themselves and the royalists commenting here keep calling for a return to civil war.

Posted on: 01 MARCH 2010 | 12:32 PM NST

8. Nirmal
the leftist King Arthur blames everyone: all people writing here are royalists. Arthur I feel sad for people like you who knows very little about the ground reality of the maoists. In almost every post you mention feudal, status quoists, counter-revolution etc but have you ever intended to know who really they are. their new base is full of people that you love to mention so often. To know nepali politics the books you read and the policies that your masters the Maoists draw are not sufficient. There a is murky line between maobaadis and khaobaadis(somebody please translate this word into correct english, if not I will do it for great communist Arthur, my english is quite poor). Learn nepali and spend more than 6 months with maoists cadres in Nepal and then come to vehemently support the Maoist, Arthur. Then we will speak as an equal.

Posted on: 01 MARCH 2010 | 6:46 PM NST

9. jange
Thank you Kamred Arthur for your analysis. So, the Maoists will definitely win any election with a large majority. If they don't then it is because the army and anti Maoist parties prevented the holding of free elections. Typical revolutionary logic.

Problem is that the lower echelons of Maoists have also been trained in the same methodology but most of them lack the verbal and logical contortion skills of Kamred Arthur.And when these lower level kamreds fail to persuade others by the logic of their argument they resort to physically inserting the concept into the heads of others thus resulting in many broken heads. Unfortunately it looks like Kamred Arthur doesn't have to see or deal with these problems so perhaps he doesn't really understand it.

As I have said elsewhere, the main problem facing all the political parties is that the Maoists continue to insist on their right to use violence to achieve their political ends and the rest of the parties do not accept this. Of course they should have made this clear in the 12 point agreement but all the parties preferred not to deal with this issue at that time. Once this issue is settled, the rest is simples.

Posted on: 01 MARCH 2010 | 8:04 PM NST

10. rishav
Arthur you have no idea what goes in the voting process in countries like Nepal. Don't compare your western democratic electoral procedure and the outcome comparable to that of Nepal. Canvassing for a party in your country would involve a little old lady or man knocking on your door asking if you have voted or not and if not if you could vote for their party. In Nepal, even without the presence of a political army such as the PLA, you will get a bunch of youths bang on your door if polite, almost man handle you to the polls, pretty much threaten you to vote for their party and also check up on you later. The threat of violence doesn't end there, a black book will be produced if your not seen involved in their demonstration marches which could have major consequences to you and your family later on. Look at Afghanistan with US, UK, UN and buddies present during their tightened security election and still major corruption and deceit was present rife.

Claiming the army to be feudal, is typical of your polluted Maoist brain Arthur. The soldiers and officers are highly professional, dedicated and have recently be honored with praise by President Obama for their work in the UN, especially in Haiti. This is our national army and we the citizens are proud of them for the work they do under such difficult circumstances. The Maoist PLA, are more like a bunch of blood thirsty politically indoctrinated guerilla mafia types. I do hope some of them are able to join the national army if they reach the standard requirements. Only then will these mafia PLA members will understand what is required to be a defender/protector of the nation and not a destroyer/insurgent.

Prachanda, your hero Arthur, who you are trying so hard to minimize the damage of his very open and honest speech he did. Lets face it after that how could any of the other parties, India, international agencies have respect, trust and faith in this big mouth leader. It is a big issue, which you also quite rightly realize as a reason why this UML coalition is still lasting, otherwise it's a coalition government with a known big mouth two-faced liar called Prachanda instead. I believe the people are now becoming less afraid of the Maoists and have started to become more vocal and critical against them, which is good for democracy. The Maoist have finally started to become weakened even internally. Prachanda had the chance in power to do something, as he cost the lives of 14,000 for him to get grab it, however when faced with a political problem with the then COAS and rather than deal with it he resigned. What respect did he show to all those people that died just because, like a spoilt child, he couldn't get his way and decided to run away without a care in the world or regard to all those sacrificed lives for him to be put in that position in the first place.

Posted on: 01 MARCH 2010 | 10:15 PM NST

11. Nirmal
Well Arthur, You analysed the NA very superficially. I also say that the NA should reorganise seriously and more democractically and it can no longer moves stubbornly with the acusations of serious human rights on its track(serving UN from the quota of poor countries' contribution is not enough to be proud of the army who bears a legitimate right to defend its people). I am sure the NA brigadiers would immediately give cheap speech like "all this smells dolors" when it comes to be answerable to these atrocities. The more the NA is assertive with the federal approach and genuine commitment and implement to human rights more it will suffer.

But I am quite optimistic with the present CoAS, he seems to be a man with will. I am in view that the reorganization of the NA should be held during his tenure. Better he keeps himself far from hindu crooks that surround the NA so often. I am sure he is able to keep the NA modern, democratic and efficient force (but mine is not an eternal belief), to the contrary the Maoists brass will need decades to purify(it is a literal translation of nepali word "suddhikaran" in english) their own cadres. The new mass base of the Maoists need a bath in Kashi. Its upto the maoists brass how they organize their kashi bath.

I have drawn a conclusion- in english-: those who had very littl became maobaadis and the day after being maobaadis, they converted into khaobaadis(ism of.greed). In nepali: khana napayera bhaye maobadi, maobaadi bhayeko bholipaltai bane khaobadi(inspired by another popular saying of nepal). Thank you for paying attention!

Posted on: 02 MARCH 2010 | 6:27 PM NST

12. Arthur
Nirmal, if I was not a foreigner unable to speak Nepali I would certainly want to spend time with both Maobadi and (corrupt and greedy) Khaobadi in order to better understand both sides. But perhaps you should take your own advice. It isn't necessary for you to learn Magar, Tamang etc to actually find out what Maoists are really saying and you could do it right within Kathmandu. But you would have to actually want to understand what they are saying, not just tell them what you think.

In almost every post you mention feudal, status quoists, counter-revolution etc

I did refer to the old feudal army (instead of the "Royal" army) in #1, but the only mention of "status quoists" or "counter-revolution" in this thread so far is yours. Also I certainly don't believe everyone writing here is royalist. Obviously in this thread, rishav is, but I would guess jange basically wants a military dictatorship rather than specifically a restored Monarchy and you don't strike me as royalist at all as you often oppose mandale ultra-nationalism. There are plenty of right-wing opponents of the Maoists who don't necessarily want a military or Royal dictatorship and I would guess you are one.

The problem I do have with your comment #8 is that you didn't actually respond to anything I said but just denounced me for saying it. That isn't a problem with your english, but an attitude towards disagreement that is very common on the right.

rishav, I mentioned north Indian Bihari style elections dominated by landlord gangs in comment #4 so obviously I don't compare Nepali elections with western elections.

Before the elections the whole Nepali media and perhaps everyone you know was certain the Maoists would lose. Now you have a fascinating explanation of why they won which makes it unecessary for you to consider that you might actually have got it wrong.

Lets assume you got this story from "reliable sources". Obviously you are not talking about the election in Kathmandu where the Maoists also "unexpectedly" won some seats, so perhaps you have heard your story from several relatives in the rural areas. These would be known to you as good honest people, looked up to by their fellow villagers who always allow the peasants who work on the land (that rightfully belongs to your relatives because they bought it honestly) without charging them a single Rupee more than the customary fair and reasonable customary half the product as rent. Your relatives always help their fellow villagers out when they happen by fate to run out of money, never charging more than the fair and reasonable custormary 40% interest. As the most educated and "connected" people in the village, naturally their fellow villagers look to them for advice on all kinds of matters, including who to vote for at elections and naturally the media and middle class circles also consult them to predict who the villagers will vote for.

Imagine the surprise of your sources when it turned out that their predictions were wrong, and the villagers had voted for the evil Maoists, despite patient explanations as to how evil they are.

Of course there are always a few trouble makers in any village and some "reliable" people (if necessary from across the border) will usually stand around near the polling booth to remind such malcontents that they have no business voting in elections which are for respectable people. But how could it end up that hardly anyone in the village except your relatives actually voted for their traditional parties? The parties that have once again promised to provide all kinds of benefits to the village as usual?

So your relatives would ask their tenants and debtors why they voted for the Maoists. Of course the tenants would explain that they would have really loved to follow the advice of your greatly respected relatives but were "forced" to vote for the Maoists by being practically dragged from their homes and past the goons into the polling booth.

If your relatives were suspicious they might have asked why they didn't just vote against the people that had intimidated them since it was a secret ballot supervised by international and local observers. Then you would have heard about the "magic binoculars" by which the evil Maoists could have discovered who voted against them.

Fortunately your relatives are not suspicious, so we were spared the "magic binoculars" in your tragic tale. They faced a clear choice between believing that their own tenants have no respect for them at all and are lying to them and support the evil Maoists or else believing that the evil Maoists are even more evil than previously understood and their good and faithful tenants really do still take their advice.

You have the same choice as to what you believe. But are you really THAT stupid? If not, what on earth makes you think that foreigners (except for people like "Anonymous") would fall for such childish explanations.

Posted on: 02 MARCH 2010 | 8:13 PM NST

13. Anonymous
Arthur, you are really pushing the boundaries of logic. North Indian Bihari style election?? That example was a great piece of work. I am now converted and I think that will just be all. Before I leave, here are some final thoughts.

I have noticed, repeatedly, that you don't fight back on reason and you sidestep every single issue. I know you are not obtuse, but you are being deliberately irritating just to push people away from having an argument.

I have not said a single thing that is not supported by facts or that does not follow a clear stream of logic. You, on the other hand, are deliberately insinuating motives that people do not have. While when your motives clearly stated by you are questioned, you sidestep.

I do not argue with anybody who is from Nepal, no matter what view they hold, because I respect the fact that it is their country, they can do what they like with it. But I have an argument with you because you repeatedly and deliberately contort others arguments and facts. I have observed this for weeks on end, and if you don't believe me just look back and see how you have ever been different or liberal. You clearly have not.

It is this that makes me repeatedly expose the communist way of thinking. The deliberate strategy to tire your enemy out simply by maintaining an extremely shrill position.

Won't you just stop and have an argument. Saying that foreigners would fall for a childish explanation when you are actually picking stuff out of BRB's book is not going to help out.

The argument that I have been trying to have is that the basis for this revolution is wrong, that there is actual, real, terror of the Maoist on the ground is a long conceded fact by everybody who is not an honorary citizen of fantasy land.

You really can't dodge a real argument by being belligerent. If you have a problem, clearly state it. I have far more important things to do than repeatedly appeal for logic.

Frankly, I have no idea why I started this off anyway. So, I concede and I surrender. This whole argument is clearly somebody else's problem.

Posted on: 02 MARCH 2010 | 9:30 PM NST

14. rishav
King Arthur(or comrade), you must really think the Maoist politburo based in Rolpa to be your Camelot and the gathering of Prachanda, Baburam and co to be the holy round table which you are obviously the King. Don't presume where I am living, unlike you I have experience of the "ground realities," see it every day. Also, I don't care if you say remarks about myself but would ask you to refrain from making comments or suggestions about my family when you don't even know me or who I am. I have seen people fly in from abroad on helicoptors most well dressed capitalist looking of Nepalese but if you ask them who did they vote for the answer is simple Maoists, if not they will kill us the response with fear in their eyes. They know as well as I do with their own eyes how these butchers(maoists) will kill indiscriminately innocent people and get away with it.

I do agree fear and intimidation as not the only reason for the recent Maoist success but also the peoples exhaustion from the daily harassment from them, especially during the insurgency, and to give in to their demands just so that they can be left alone with a hope of peace. Their has been long standing political failures from all the democratic parties which is another reason the Maoist got in as the untested, new kids on the block but as per usual this group like all those Nepali politicians before them have promised but didn't deliver. So now the Nepali people are left wondering what has this party and events leading to their arrival into mainstream politics has really meant and whether it was all worth it especially looking at how country is today.

Posted on: 02 MARCH 2010 | 10:31 PM NST

15. Nirmal
Arthur, and how do you know that I don't speak another nepali languages. For your kind information:I speak nepali, newari(with which I also grew), and maithili(not so fluent as newari) and thanks to indian movies, Hindi too apart from other 4 foreign languages. Now I wonder If Prachanda, baburam and other messiahs from Maoists do speak another nepali languages! And it is very typic of self-declared leftists to name others rightist when someone tell them to care the form to follow not only the core of the matter.
I overcame long ago my poster of Che Guevara because it disgusts me deeply losing so much energy to say things so obvious: In the name of freedom or justice one cannot kill or destroy fundamental rights, in the name of freedom one cannot defend dictators or authoritarian groups. For me being a leftist is more than an ideological definition. It is an attitude towards life, society and thought. It involves exercising criticisms and self-criticisms. I do not accept or understand the ideological position of the Maoists(which includes Arthur too) which serves as an excuse for channeling uncritical dogma, simplistic Manchaeism, covert racism, and worse, to verbalise nonsense.
It is hour that this so called left turns into a real democratic, modern and non-militaristic force of the country.

Posted on: 02 MARCH 2010 | 11:13 PM NST

16. Budabaaje

"...the behaviour of the political leadership is just the opposite of what they say." Right, I remember people making the same complaint about the king. So what has changed? No matter who comes to power, they all say one thing and do another. At least the king was committed to providing law and order. And as a businessman, he'd surely have done better at keeping investors around too.

And,

"...Maoists wouldn't be Maoists unless they are committed to a violent overthrow of the state and its replacement by a totalitarian people's republic." Now you tell us! So what was all that "Maoists are ready to join mainstream politics! Give them a safe-landing! Peaceful solution!" credo you sold us and all of the Nepali janata about? Was that your genius act of hoodwinking the Nepali public? Talk about "fork tongues". Same people who made darlings out of the Maoists are now telling us what the king and his generals used to say about them! What is one to make of it?!

Here's the bottom-line. It's not just politicians that cheat, lie, and deceive the Nepali people. These journalists, editors, publishers (whatever they want to call themselves) are no different!

Neta hos ki patrakar. Jo sukai aaye pani kaan matra haina, jibro pani chireko!!

Posted on: 03 MARCH 2010 | 6:13 AM NST

17. Arthur
Nirmal, re #11. Its true my remarks on Nepal Army are only superficial, but I was responding to the publisher's article which did not mention it at all and therefore found the current political deadlock "inexplicable". I agree with you that the current COAS seems better than the previous one. Dont forget the next one will another of the Ranas and Thapas under the current system of promotion.

Like you, Prachanda and the Maoists also express more optimistic views about the Nepal Army than I did, and they also agree that the PLA needs to "professionalize".

From the history of China and other revolutions it is certain that some of the poor who began as Maobadis will end up as Khaobadis. Although I understand the Khaobadi "ism", I don't know what a kashi bath means in english but I am quite confident that the Maoist leadership understand that competitive multi-party politics with free speech etc is necessary, not to please donors but in order to expose and defeat Maobadis that become Khaobadis.

Meanwhile Nepal still has a government of Khaobadis and two armies and the publisher finds it "inexplicable" that there is a deadlock and more corruption than ever! Let us call that "inexplicablism".

Perhaps we could at least agree that the publisher needs to think more deeply?

Posted on: 03 MARCH 2010 | 6:25 AM NST

18. jange
Anonymous ji, you are trying too hard and making things more complex than they are. A few things to remember:
- the Maoists are a mafia organisation and not a poitial party
- the other parties have conceded that the Maoists have a right to use violence to achieve their ends. A concession which they now regret and are realising thatt it was untenable
- The people of Nepal of Nepal are fed up with Maoist vioence and will not suffer it in silence. You will soon see a situation where the Nepal Army will be called upon to protect the Maoist leaders from their own followers.

Posted on: 03 MARCH 2010 | 7:08 AM NST

19. Arthur
rishav in #10 you explained that Maoists won because they forcibly dragged voters to the polls, threatening them. In #11 I assumed that you actually believed it and perhaps got your story from people you trust such as relatives in rural areas. Now in #14 you tell us "I have seen people fly in from abroad on helicoptors most well dressed capitalist looking of Nepalese but if you ask them who did they vote for the answer is simple Maoists, if not they will kill us the response with fear in their eyes...."

Ok, so the Maoists won because they dragged to the polls well dressed capitalist Nepalese who flew in from abroad on helicopters, threatening them. Now I understand you much better. Thank you and have a nice day.

Nirmal, in #17 I replied to your #11 (which I had not seen when I wrote #12), because it appeared to be entering into actual discussion and argument, unlike #8. Unfortunately your #15 confirms that you do not understand the views of Maoists but makes no attempt to go beyond simply denouncing the views you do not understand. If you want actual discussion I suggest responding to what I said in #17. If you don't want actual discussion, that's up to you. I'm not interested in denouncing people for having different views from mine. I am much more interested in showing that they are wrong and should change their views! That requires carefully reading what they actually say to try and understand what they think, which is much more interesting than simply denouncing, even though it is also more difficult.

Budabaaje, "Same people who made darlings out of the Maoists are now telling us what the king and his generals used to say about them! What is one to make of it?!"

What I make of it is that such people will become as deeply respected as the king and his generals ;-)

PS In fairness to the publisher of Nepali Times I must add a note of sympathy. He writes a "brave" article saying its now time for the government he welcomed before to go (and implying, though not yet saying, that it should be replaced by a Maoist led coalition - ie the government he was previously glad to see brought down, hopefully this time with Congress participating as well instead of remaining in opposition). But nobody actually discusses that big shift in position!

Seems everybody already knew this government has to go and also knows what the only alternative to it is (apart from jange's dreams of turmoil followed by military rule).

Does anyone actually have an argument to show that Nepal can have "a government in place" without requiring the military to obey the orders of that government?

Posted on: 03 MARCH 2010 | 4:06 PM NST

20. Nirmal
Arthur I have no interest on following your manichaeism. The things are simple: abandon arms forever, refrain from using it as condons and come to political process as one more, it is upto them If they want to differentiate them from other baddies of politics by now they seem no angels of politics.

Posted on: 03 MARCH 2010 | 5:42 PM NST

21. Nilabh
No, you are not interested in a serious discussion and no you do not understand the Maoist position either.

The army is already democratic, it stayed on the sidelines during the entire crisis, it followed orders at all times. If you want to argue, get some facts and then do it.

The COAS refused to co-operate because the Maoist were instigating a soft coup whereby they would have installed a favourable general who would concede to integrating illegal combatants into the army and hurt its structure. It would also lead to demoralisation within the ranks, the new entrants getting cocky about their position in the army, hurting discipline that has kept the structure together. That is as simple as that.

Now you can spout disconnected venom once again or just accept the truth as it is. Simple and straight and undeniable other than by propaganda.

Posted on: 03 MARCH 2010 | 6:32 PM NST

22. Nirmal
Nilabh don't joke saying that it is already democratic.... perhaps Katwaals type of democracy, no?

Posted on: 03 MARCH 2010 | 6:48 PM NST

23. Nilabh
Furthermore, for anyone interested, the army publishes statistics on personnel who were punished demoted and/or referred to civilian courts. This is accessible to anyone interested in getting that information.

In short, 30 officers were punished with a range of punishment, including jail terms, demotion, discharge from service etc, etc.

None of that is a secret really, there are outstanding issues and if the Maoist were reasonable they would clearly say what exactly was their problem what are the specific shortcomings and then find a solution for that. Obviously, both the political parties and the Maoist are least interested in that, busy as they are scoring brownie points to maintain their constituencies at the expense of national interest.

Anyway, who cares. I am willing to bet my bottom penny that we are going to get a new constitution on time. That it will pander to the virtues that would never be practiced and that there will be a new series of crisis and the same old, same old or whatever.

Posted on: 03 MARCH 2010 | 6:52 PM NST

24. Budabaaje

To Arthur on Maoist-Army issue: Look, we're not fools here. The Maoists went way too far with the Army. In the name of civilian control they were trying to bring it under party-control by installing a favorite general. If Maoists want the power to do as they wish, then they need to come to parliament with two-thirds majority. With only 38%, Maoists have no option but to work with all other reps of the people. Other parties were opposed to Maoists' action against COAS Katawal. So Maoists were just plain wrong in that case. Every Nepali is smart enough to know that.

Besides, before Maoists take up the business of "democratizing" the Army, the Nepali people want to see the Maoists themselves becoming "democratized" first. Only then they will have the credibility to play around with the national army. Until such a time, Nepali people will fully support the Army to stand up to the Maoists. So the ball is in the Maoists' court to get the trust and support of the people by "democratizing" itself!

Posted on: 03 MARCH 2010 | 6:57 PM NST

25. Arthur
According to Nilabh the COAS refusing to carry out the orders of the elected government to implement the requirements of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement and the Interim Constitution for democratizing the Nepal Army and integrating the two armies is what he means by "democratic". There is no need to argue - just accept that is the new definition of democratic.

The COAS will decide instead of the elected government. It is "as simple as that".

What a pity the rest of the world has a different understanding of the relations between elected governments and armies in a democracy from Nilabh.

Nirmal also has no need to argue. Naturally the Maoists will "abandon arms forever" now that Nilabh has explained the true meaning of democracy means that those with guns decide instead of the elected government.

Poor jange, it must be frustrating trying to recruit people for turmoil to enable military rule when the potential recruits for his campaign are so unimpressive.

Posted on: 03 MARCH 2010 | 7:51 PM NST

26. jange
Thank you kamred Arthur. You know things about me that even I myself do not know! It is no wonder that you know so much about Nepal, its politics and its institutions. Wish I had such powers of divination.

Posted on: 03 MARCH 2010 | 8:17 PM NST

27. Nilabh
Yeah sure, by the way I had posted a follow up of that which did not get posted and since this is seen as a joke, how does it matter anyway. Objectivism, RIP.And, yes I did mean Katwal type of democracy.

Posted on: 03 MARCH 2010 | 8:56 PM NST

28. Budabaaje
To Nirmal (#22): Tell me which institution in Nepal would you describe as "democratic"? I have no personal liking for Katawal, but if "Katawal type of democracy" is so bad, which is better? "Koirala type" or "Prachanda type" or which other type?

Posted on: 03 MARCH 2010 | 9:00 PM NST

29. Nilabh
Yeah and you will also take it easy on the sarcasm. See, here is the thing that you understand but in your effort to just kill everyone with your obfuscated logic.

Democratic also means garnering support of your coalition partners when you are a minority government. The Maoist did not get that did they? Instead they simply resigned.

The rest of the world understands the use of the term democracy and also the basis for governance.

That is why military regulations in countries not ruled by treacherous clowns are separated from civil jurisdiction. That is also the reason why armies are under the command of non-executive heads of state. So that a political party does not interfere in the workings of a very important institution arbitrarily to gain momentary influence over the opposition and to weaken the nation in accordance with their ideology.

And, look who is talking of democracy. The ones who picked up arms against it, systematically destroyed local governance, murdered and continue to murder and intimidate people and actively worked towards the destruction of a fledgling multi-party democracy.

The fact is that the Maoist party is so used to making shrill noises that they were uncomfortable accepting responsibility. Not that their partners in crime are any better, but then what do you expect from hypocrites.

Posted on: 03 MARCH 2010 | 9:26 PM NST

30. Nilabh
Yeah and you will also take it easy on the sarcasm. See, here is the thing that you understand but in your effort to just kill everyone with your obfuscated logic.

Democratic also means garnering support of your coalition partners when you are a minority government. The Maoist did not get that did they? Instead they simply resigned.

The rest of the world understands the use of the term democracy and also the basis for governance.

Posted on: 03 MARCH 2010 | 9:40 PM NST

31. Niel
I see no point of this discussion. You guys are going nowhere. Let Nepal face maoist rule. I guess Nepalese are not yet satisfied with the sufferings at the hands of Maoists.

Look, I have had no connection with Nepal till very recently. But what I have seen in this short period of time and of what I know of the Maoists in India, I must say the real hell is yet to happen. I have see how Maoists enforce banda every other day. How they collect ransom every day.

I had visited Nepal after 15 years and can't explain how saddened I was seeing this lovely country ravaged so badly. And for what?

Maoists are not and never will be interested in Democracy. Look around the world. Nowhere you will find a communist ruled state respecting its people's fundamental rights or bringing prosperity to the nation. It has only brought in suffering, corruption and a revolution gone horribly wrong.

I do agree every nation is different, every revolution is different. But unfortunately Maoists in Nepal are no different. They are only interested in imposing what they think is right and that too by any means possible.

Posted on: 03 MARCH 2010 | 10:17 PM NST

32. rishav
Arthur the Great. Hmm! I am starting to wonder! Why such interest in Nepal? Why such unequivocal love and support for our Maoists? I admit you seem to know about the political events that occurred recently as published by the various media houses but through the tainted Maoist loving spectacles. I suspect you may be an academic doing research in Nepal especially in regard to the political events and the media. You also seem to have a lot of time on your hands to write such lengthy comments and to be honest I only select certain things you write to read, just a bit boring really. Your not a linguist, well not of Nepali anyway, you would have picked up on certain messages and phrases.

As you are quite extreme in your left wing orientation which is not that unusual for academics studying in southern asian areas. I suspect you may belong to a socialist workers party if not a communist party of your own country, most likely a capitalist democratic nation, which leaves you feeling quite under appreciated for your views, even laughed at for them as well. So the combination of being ridiculed by your country men/women for your views and the irony being that despite your socialist views you need the capitalist entrepreneurs services(starbucks, mcdonalds, etc etc) providing the infrastructure for your successful capitalist democratic home nation. Is it annoying that despite the hatred of the system of Government you live in, it is also a system which always and respects you for disagreeing with it as well(Freedom of speech).

I guess in Nepal with all the Maoist insurgency, you have found a corner of the world which might share your extreme beliefs in communism and accept you as a fellow comrade. Unfortunately, our Maoists don't really care that they have the support of starbuck's coffee drinking communist preachers from the west. They have enough preachers in their own party let alone the need to have foreign ones trying to tell them what to do. Arthur unless you have $$$$ or ???? to give to them, the Maoists wouldn't listen or care what you thought. They would rather sit down and talk to someone like Donald Trump than have a chat with you.

So don't try using this site in order to patronize us Nepalese on why the Maoists are so great and the best thing since Mount Sagamatha for us Nepalis. You are not Nepali, probably haven't even lived in Nepal for any great length of time and you have the odacity to tell us how things are for us here. You are mental and need some help.

Posted on: 03 MARCH 2010 | 10:18 PM NST

33. Foreigner

For heaven's sake!Kasto nationalist bhako eh Rishav!Timro yo Nepal bujhna Nepali hunuparcha bhanne argument chai malai pattakai chitta bhujena. Your arguments reek of chauvinism.

Posted on: 03 MARCH 2010 | 1:11 AM NST

34. Arthur
Ok, so rishav has stopped explainig how people flying in on helicopters with fear in their eyes convinced him the Maoists became the largest party by forcibly dragging people to the polls. Instead, in #32 he is now taking my advice (#19) to just have a nice day.

Nilabh (#27) and Budabaaje (#28) have confirmed to Nirmal (#22) that what they are not joking, they really do want Katwaals type of democracy. They do not mean they would prefer to vote for Katwaal in free elections. They mean it does not matter what the people vote for, the Army will decide because they have the guns.

So Nirmal (#20) is stuck. He doesn't want Army rule and he wants the Maobadi to "abandon arms for ever". But how can he expect them to do so now that he understands, as the Maoists do, that Army rule is not a joke?

Now Nilabh (#29=30) and Budabaaje (#23) have another point in common, apart from believing those with guns should take the decisions.

They also claim (#24, #29=30) that the Maoists are undemocratic because they were leading a coalition and other parties in the coalition opposed their decision on Katwaal.

That is a much more widely held view than their support for Army rule, although in practice it turns out to have the same result - ie the peace agreement does not get carried out, the two armies are not integrated and Nepal can drift on with increasing political instability until eventually people are softened up to accept Army rule again.

Instead the Maoists proved that they are far more democratic than any other party by simply resigning from government instead of compromising over principles in order to cling to office. They did not run to the jungles. They simply let the other parties demonstrate once again how corrupt and useless they are.

Now we have had 9 months of that and it will soon be impossible to pretend that Nepal has a government in place while that government is afraid to carry out the peace agreement.

jange can still hope that this will end up in turmoil and army rule. But as a foreigner it is very difficult for me to understand his hopes. What possible use could people like Nilabh and rishav be in softening people up for Army rule?

If the officer corps has any sense of dignity it should prefer to be transformed over 5-7 years rather than becoming such objects of ridicule.

Posted on: 04 MARCH 2010 | 5:45 AM NST

35. Nirmal
Arthur enough of your childish reasoning, I already said: I am not going to support an armed group fearing another one! Did you get my point?

Posted on: 04 MARCH 2010 | 4:01 PM NST

36. rishav
To foreigner, I don't see what your problem is. Yes I have become more of a nationalist now than ever because of what is happening to our country. My argument or what I say is quite easily understood nor am I a chauvinist. I guess we should agree to disagree.

Arthur your so interested about my helicopter story, then I will tell you but you got to pay it back and tell me a few things about you?? Anyway, were i live there are some families who have relatives who live abroad in the US and UK. Sometimes the parents, who can afford it, will go and visit their grown up children abroad, staying for sometime with them. So I don't always meet up with them but when the parents return as in this case, I did get a chance to catch up. My argument being that if the most affluent or financially stable of us Nepalese still have this fear, what hope of free choice is there for the poor.

Yet again Arthur, you seem to play with people's words and misguide other readers of what we are trying to say. Yes intimidation was a a factor in the Maoist getting into power(well forming a minority government), but there other factors which I have outlined before which you choose so skillfully to ignore such as peoples exhaustion of the insurgency, hope of peace to be left alone, complete political apathy, rise in madhesi based parties, trying out an untested new party from the ones before. I also concluded that people have started to realize whether the cost of our current situation was worth 14,000 people dead and all the problems we face now. Especially seeing how useless the Maoists were in government and as a political party not that much different to the ones before(besides having politically armed gangs called the PLA and YCL).

I guess you views about Prachanda and the maoists will never change, leaving you with your messed up extreme left wing views. So I bid you farewell and hope you continue to enjoy wacking off as usual to the picture of Mr dahal(prachnda) and co. If this does give you great satisfaction definitely please continue because from what you write you don't sound so mentally stable.

Posted on: 04 MARCH 2010 | 4:29 PM NST

37. Nilabh
Rishav, don't take this personally. If you believe in something just say it and say it clearly. This space is not owned by Arthur that he can hound you out or whatever. It is your country, you have a right to speak, have courage and stand up for what is right. All you have to do is look at all the comments that Arthur has made (and the ones before that and after) and you will know that he never has anything to argue with and that is why he attempts to change the topic each time he is challenged and changes meanings just so that he can fill up space.

Look at how childishly he tries to turn the argument on its head. Every right thinking persons case rests on that fact that the Nepal Army is apolitical and that it has stayed within the confines of the barracks in accordance with the agreement reached without that institutions agreement. That I am against any role of the army in politics is obvious. That I detest militarism in politics is obvious. No position needs to be clarified.

What is laughable is him repeatedly shouting the same false message about Jange and Anonymous and about Satya Nepali, about you. He does that because he is afraid that he is being repeatedly exposed.

Here is the truth about communists, they don't want a discussion, they want to shout. Let them. I am here for democracy, no matter how much he shouts the truth is not going to change.

You speak your mind and stand up for your country and for what you believe. Show absolutely no hesitation. Say you believe in democracy, rule of law, peaceful politics, efficient governance, freedom of expression, freedom to practice your religion and say it out clearly and repeatedly. The best way to deal with the evil of communism is to SPEAK THE TRUTH.

Posted on: 04 MARCH 2010 | 6:39 PM NST

38. rishav
Thank you Nilabh for your advice and supporting message. Nice to know their are like minded people out there who believe and also want to see the Nepali people have their democratic rights without fear or intimidation.

Posted on: 05 MARCH 2010 | 11:50 AM NST